Recommended Posts

For now, the ball is in the court of Parliament's Constitutional Review Committee, which will consider whether to amend the Constitution to allow expropriation of land without compensation and how it will be done.

This, after the National Assembly, adopted EFF leader Julius Malema's motion in this regard on Tuesday.

The original motion called for the establishment of an ad hoc committee to review and amend section 25 of the Constitution to make it possible for the state to expropriate land in the public interest, without compensation.

The ANC proposed an amendment to the motion, which was adopted, that the Constitutional Review Committee "undertake a process of consultation to determine the modalities of the governing party resolution".

The resolution it refers to was taken at the ANC's conference in Johannesburg in December, to allow expropriation of land without compensation, subject to a feasibility study, to ensure that food security and the economy were not threatened.

"[The] conference resolved that the ANC should, as a matter of policy, pursue expropriation of land without compensation. This should be pursued without destabilizing the agricultural sector, without endangering food security in our country and without undermining economic growth and job creation," the ANC's conference declaration reads.

President Cyril Ramaphosa also said on several occasions that expropriation without compensation will be explored to ensure that it does not undermine economic growth and food security.

The Constitutional Review Committee

The committee comprises members of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces. ANC MPs Lewis Nzimade and Vincent Smith are the co-chairpersons. Among the 22 members of the committee are the ANC's Mathole Motshekga and Francois Beukman (who both served on the ad hoc committees on Nkandla), the DA's James Selfe and Glynnis Breytenbach and the EFF's Floyd Shivambu.

This committee deals with proposals to amend the Constitution, which can be submitted by the public. They will have hearings where members of the public, civil society and parties can present their proposals.

The National Assembly gave the committee a deadline of 30 August to report back on its work.

If the committee decides to indeed amend the Constitution, it will have to draft the amendment.

What is to be considered for the amendment?

Section 25 of the Constitution deals with property and is often called the "property clause".

In its current form, it states that "no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property" and that "[property] may be expropriated only in terms of law of general application (a) for a public purpose or in the public interest; and (b) subject to compensation, the amount of which and the time and manner of payment of which have either been agreed to by those affected or decided or approved by a court".

Section 25 also says the "state must take reasonable legislative and other measures, within its available resources, to foster conditions which enable citizens to gain access to land on an equitable basis".

Parties' policy on expropriation

Since its inception, the EFF agitated for expropriation without compensation.

"The state should, through its legislative capacity transfer all land to the state, which will administer and use the land for sustainable-development purposes. This transfer should happen without compensation and should apply to all South Africans, black and white," reads the EFF's policy on its website.

Thus, if the EFF's policy is adopted, all land will belong to the state.

After Tuesday's debate on the motion, Malema said this does not mean people will lose their homes, factories or industries.

The ANC's policy on what will happen after the land is expropriated without compensation is less clear.

Given the caveats that it should not harm economic growth and food security, and Ramaphosa's utterances that it should be used as a way to kick-start an "agricultural revolution", it seems the ANC's policy will not entail expropriating all land and transferring it to the state, but rather focus on specific pieces of land that will be used for land reform projects.

Other parties who supported the expropriation without compensation principle are the IFP, UDM, NFP, Agang, AIC, and APC.

The DA does not support it, even though it says it "is fully committed to redressing the history of violent land dispossession in South Africa, and the social and economic legacy of this dispossession which still exists in our country today".

"The DA will defend the Constitution and show that expropriation without compensation is not the solution to assisting the poor and marginalized in accessing land and economic opportunities," DA MP and spokesperson on rural development and land reform Thandeka Mbabama said in a statement released on Wednesday.

"We believe it is possible to achieve the aims of land reform and to do so in a way that truly empowers black people and strengthens the economy. We reject the opportunism of launching an attack on the Constitution to deflect from the failures of the ANC-led government."

Other parties opposing expropriation without compensation are Cope, the ACDP and the Freedom Front Plus.

How to change the Constitution

To amend the Constitution, two-thirds of the National Assembly must vote for a proposed amendment and, in the National Council of Provinces, six of the nine provinces must be for the proposed amendment.

This means 267 of the National Assembly's members must vote for the proposed amendment. The ANC currently has 249 MPs and the EFF 25.

The EFF has repeatedly promised to vote for an amendment that would allow expropriation without compensation.

This means that there will be enough votes to amend the Constitution if all ANC and EFF MPs vote according to party lines.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

"My white South African friends who wish to comment on this week’s decision of Parliament to investigate possibly changing the Constitution to expedite land expropriation without compensation, please remember that this is not the first time the South African government has taken land without paying for it. In fact, it’s at least the fifteenth time the government of South Africa has passed laws to take land. I provide a list below for helpful reference - these were the apartheid era land acts.

Please do us a favour: if your ancestors did not comment about the previous fifteen times the government took land (and I am guessing that, like mine, they did not), then right now would be a good time to be quiet for a bit and listen.

Not forever. Just for a bit. And then calmly contribute to the conversation over the next few weeks and months in an attempt to find a solution that helps everyone.

Also, before you comment on the issue, please read the preamble of the motion put to Parliament this week and tell us how you respond to the fact that the government land audit has found that less than 7% of land in South Africa is owned by private black individuals. No, seriously, please start any comments on this issue with your thoughts and feelings on that statistic.

Now, here is that list I was speaking about - white people, let’s own this a bit please; the government of SA has been taking land for a long time; you just don’t it like it this time because for the first time its not white skinned people doing the taking:

- The Glen Grey act of 1894 (Under Cecil John Rhodes)

- The Native Land Act of 1913 (Act 27)

- The Transvaal Asiatic Land Tenure of 1930.

- The Riotous Assemblies Act 19 - 1930.

- The Asiatic Immigration Amendment Act of 1931.

- The Native Service Contracts Act of 1932.

- The Native Trust and Land Act of 1936 (Act 18)

- The Slums Act of 1934.

- The Development Trust and Land Act of 1936 (Act 18)

- The Rural Dealers Licensing Act of 1935.

- The Representation of Blacks Act 12 of 1936.

- The Black (Native) Laws Amendment Act 46 of 1937

- The Pegging Act of 1946

- The group areas act of 1950 (Act. 41)

And PS, for those who always moan about “how far back do we have to go”, all but the first two of these Acts were passed in my grandmother’s lifetime. She was born in Feb 1914. And she’s still alive. So, no, this isn’t going back too far.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Would like to know though, if you do have land, and a bond at the bank, do they take that over when they take your land? If someone is going to take your land, do you keep paying the bond? Maybe my questions sound a bit dumb, but I have never had land or a bond.

Link to post

Share on other sites

If it comes to that either you are going to keep paying for the loan, default or the bank will be forced to take the hit and cancel the loan.

If that is the case then I cannot fathom what would happen. To me, the only possible outcome I see is private "military style" services being hired to protect the land, basically passive civil war.

A different note, without a doubt this will affect food security, is there not some international body that protects countries from themselves who can step in, I mean I hate the US, but I think we can use some democracy in South Africa and I heard the US delivers democracy in 48 freedoms per second.